Scientists: Methane from spacecraft landing on the Moon could “obscure” evidence of life

Chicken Little rules!
Chicken Little rules!

Chicken Little stupidity now abounds everywhere! Scientists using computer models say the methane fuel that many lunar landers will use can spread quickly across the entire Moon and then “obscure” any evidence of life that might be found there.

Sinibaldi and Francisca Paiva, a physicist at Instituto Superior Técnico and lead author of the study, built a computer model to simulate how that contamination might play out, using the European Space Agency’s Argonaut mission as a case study. The simulations focused on how methane, the main organic compound released during combustion of Argonaut propellants, might spread across the lunar surface during a landing at the moon’s South Pole. While previous studies had investigated how water molecules might move on the moon, none had done so for organic molecules like methane. The new model also accounted for how factors like solar wind and UV radiation would impact the methane’s behavior.

…The model showed exhaust methane reaching the North Pole in under two lunar days. Within seven lunar days (almost 7 months on Earth), more than half of the total exhaust methane had been “cold trapped” at the frigid poles — 42% at the South Pole and 12% at the North.

Though this result is of interest, as it suggests such exhaust can spread quickly on a low-gravity planet with no atmosphere, these scientists then make themselves look like fools by claiming this quick spread will contaminate the Moon, thus hindering the search for evidence of life there, and thus require new “planetary protection” measures. From their paper’s conclusion:

As lunar exploration unfolds, prioritizing effective and informed planetary protection measures will be key for safeguarding the Moon’s pristine scientific value and paving the way for a sustainable and responsible lunar exploration.

The level of foolishness in these claims is hard to measure. The Moon is the least likely place to search for evidence of past life. And regardless, limiting the use of methane fuel but allowing other exploration is not going to solve their problem. The mere presence of human activity is going to “contaminate” the Moon’s “pristine” environment. To make believe it is possible to impose some rules to prevent it is idiocy.

This whole study and its focus on “planetary protection” is really aimed at protecting the turf of these scientists. If others are allowed to explore the planets with different goals (profit or settlement instead of pure scientific research), their playground will be spoiled. Thus, they write these reports designed to give them ammunition for convincing governments to impose regulations in their favor. And they know they have allies in the UN for this purpose.

They also know they have willing allies in the propaganda press. Be prepared for numerous mainstream stories in the next day or so, touting this study with no skepticism.

Scientists propose changes to planetary protection rules

In a new report [pdf], a panel of scientists have proposed major revisions to NASA’s policy for protecting other planets from contamination by Earth biology.

In general, the recommendations seem an effort to streamline the rules (first established in the 1960s), while also making them more reflective of present knowledge. For example, the report says the following,

NASA should also rethink how it classifies the surfaces of the Moon and Mars, the report says. All of the Moon is now classified as potentially of interest to research on the origins of life, meaning NASA doesn’t want to contaminate it with imports from Earth. But few scientists now view the Moon as an important site for studying such questions—except for its poles, where ice that might have helped sustain life exists. Reclassifying much of the Moon’s surface as nonessential for biological studies would simplify exploration for NASA and other space agencies—along with commercial actors. Similarly, the report says, much of Mars has been treated as if microbes that landed on its surface could survive and be transported to regions thought to host water and allow the replication of life. But many scientists think that outcome is unlikely and worth rethinking.

Because it’s possible that humans could return to the Moon, and arrive on Mars, in the next few decades, NASA should also think about establishing two management zones on the bodies, the report adds. The first would create protected astrobiology zones considered essential for the exploration of possible extinct or existing life. The second would be human exploration zones that invariably would be exposed to the zoo of microbes that accompany humans anywhere they go.

The report also recommends changes to the rules governing samples returned from other words that would streamline the process as well as tailor it more closely to present knowledge. It also recommends that the rules be better written to accommodate and encourage private enterprise in space.

All in all this appears to be a remarkably intelligent report, quite unlike what I expected. Almost always such reports from government instituted panels demand more stringent rules and greater governmental power. This report appears to call for exactly the opposite, while suggesting reasonable restrictions to protect both the Earth and any alien life that might be on other worlds.